One Senate Republican insults our Intelligence

For the first time in 27 years, a senator (a Republican who prefers to remain anonymous) has blocked the Senate Intelligence authorization bill. You’ll never guess why.

Senate Republicans late Wednesday blocked the authorization bill that guides the country’s intelligence programs. It was the first time in 27 years that the bill had failed to pass before the end of the calendar year. […]

Democrats were informed last week that Republicans would clear the bill if three amendments, two by Sen. Edward M. Kennedy (D-Mass.) and one by Sen. John F. Kerry (D-Mass.), would be stripped from the consent agreement. But Democrats balked because Sen. Pat Roberts (R-Kan.), the chairman of the Senate intelligence panel, had agreed to the amendments. Roberts’s staff did not return calls for comment yesterday.

Kerry’s amendment would require the director of national intelligence to give the intelligence panels information on secret CIA prisons in several Eastern European democracies and in Asia. Kennedy’s amendments would require the White House to turn over copies of daily intelligence briefs that President Bush and former President Bill Clinton reviewed on Iraq.

In other words, a Republican senator is blocking funding for intelligence programs, during a war, because the spending bill includes language that demands some accountability from the Bush administration. If the bill dropped the oversight provisions, the anonymous hold would disappear.

Your Republican Party at work.

Post Script: This is probably a little off-topic, but the story reminded me of a major part of last year’s presidential race. Just a year ago, the Bush campaign and the RNC blatantly lied (repeatedly) about John Kerry’s votes on Senate Intelligence authorization bills as part of a ridiculous, demagogic, and ultimately successful smear job. To hear the GOP tell it, if you don’t support the intelligence budget, you don’t support national security. I obviously don’t expect the White House and the RNC to hold their own to similar standards — consistency is not their strong point — but I wanted to mention it anyway.

“Kerry’s amendment would require the director of national intelligence to give the intelligence panels information on secret CIA prisons in several Eastern European democracies and in Asia. Kennedy’s amendments would require the White House to turn over copies of daily intelligence briefs that President Bush and former President Bill Clinton reviewed on Iraq.”

Does Bush get a pass if he never read the daily briefs?

“This is probably a little off-topic, but the story reminded me of a major part of last year’s presidential race. Just a year ago, the Bush campaign and the RNC blatantly lied (repeatedly) about John Kerry’s votes on Senate Intelligence authorization bills as part of a ridiculous, demagogic, and ultimately successful smear job. To hear the GOP tell it, if you don’t support the intelligence budget, you don’t support national security. I obviously don’t expect the White House and the RNC to hold their own to similar standards — consistency is not their strong point — but I wanted to mention it anyway.”

I don’t think it’s OT at all. Everyone should be accountable for the things they said during the elections, especially the GOP. I hope this hypocracy makes it into a talking point and GOP talking heads get cornered with it on national news shows. I can see Russert asking it on this Sunday’s Meet The Press. “When campaigning for Bush last year against Sen. Kerry, you pointed to Kerry’s votes against national intelligence budgets as unpatriotic and anti-military, anti-troops, and anti-American. How do you defend the flip-flop you made this week in voting against next year’s national intelligence budget? Are you coming out as unpatriotic, anti-military, anti-troops, and anti-American?” That would be quite a Christmas present.